GolfHos
 
*
June 06, 2020, 02:49:03 AM
Username: Password: Duration:

[Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win

 
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win  (Read 1376 times)
0 Members and 1 Lurker/Spider are viewing this topic.
MFAWG
Rich Corinthian Leather Jacket

Karma: 31
Posts: 5720
Offline Offline


View ProfileIgnore this user
[Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« on: October 22, 2009, 12:25:53 PM »

On the tails of The Senator from Minnesota's little set to comes this absolute gem from 2 Southern Gentlemen:

Chairman:    "Mr. Grayson is recognized."

Grayson:     "Thank you. I'd like to ask the gentleman from Georgia a few questions, and I'll yeild to him for the purpose of having answers to these questions. Um, Does the gentleman from Georgia know what a bill of Attainder is?"

Broun (R-GA)     "A bill of, the answer's yes, in fact it's been very explicitly described by the court's."

Grayson:     "What is it?"

Looooooooooooooong pause while Broun looksthrough notes for an answer

Broun:      "The courts have applied a two pronged test. Number one, whether specific individuals or entities are affected by the staute, Number two, when the legislation affects a Quote "Punishment" End quote, on those individuals, it serves no legitamate regulatory purpose. "

Grayson:     "What, um, does the Constitution says about
Bills of Attainder?"

Broun:      "Oh, I suggest that this is not a Bill of Attainder. It's, um, certainly does focus on a specific entity, but it does not inflict punishment by any means. In fact. . . "

Grayson:     "Will the gentleman from Georgia explain what the Constitution says about Bills of Attainder?"

Outside Voice/another Republican:     "Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a second? The gentleman from Florida?"

Grayson:     "No. I'd like an answer to my question."

Outside Voice/another Republican:     "Well, frankly, I can't wait to see the discussion when it comes to . . . . "

Grayson:     "I did NOT yeild, and I'd like an answer fron the gentleman from Georgia to my question, I. . ."

Chairman:     "Li, Li, Listen, let's get back to all the time, is Mister, the gentleman from Florida, who will yeild to the gentleman from Georgia, will . . ."

Grayson:     "Right. What does the Constitution say about Bills of Attainder? It's a simple question."

Broun:     "The Constitution says "Congress shall pass no Bills of Attainder" but this is not one . . . "

Grayson:     "Alright, now, would you agree with me that it is UnConstitutional to single out one or more persons without the benefit of trial?"

Broun:     "Uh, no sir, there is a two pronged test, this is not a Bill of Attainder, it is . . . "

Grayson:     "Alright, well, when I, when I said, I'll reclaim my time. I just quoted William Rehnquist writing the book "The Supreme Court", he wrote that book and said "You can not single out on or more persons without the benefit of a trial." Will the gentleman agree that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"

Broun:     "The two main criteria which courts would like to look, in order to determine whether legislation is a Bill of Attainder, one is whether a specific individual/entity is affected by extension, number two, whether the legislation affects a punishmenyt on the individuals . . . "

Grayson:     "Will the gentleman please tell me whether you agree or not that Bills of Attainder are contrary to every principle of sound legislation?"

Broun:     "Bills of Attainder are UnConstitutional."

Grayson:     "AND contrary to every principle of sound legislation, is that correct?"

Broun:    "That's correct."

Grayson:     "Alright. And you know who said that?"

Broun:     "Tell me."

Grayson:      "James Madison in the Federalist papers."

    "Now, do you, does the gentleman agree that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree with me on that."

Outside Republican:     "Will the Gentleman yield?"

Grayson:     "No."

    Laughter throughout the committee room , then silence. . .

Outside Representative:     "Um, the, the, will the gentleman restate the question?"

Grayson:     "The question is, will the gentleman from Georgia agree with me that the Bill of Attainder clause was intended not as a narrow or technical provision, but rather as an implementation of the seperation of powers, and a general safeguard against legislative exercise of the judicial function, or more simply, trial by legislation. Wil the gentleman agree to that?"

Broun:      "No, sir, I will not, and I ask counsel to help us with this, I think all this is determination of the court and I'd like to appeal to Mr. Sensenberner (wingnut who's name I refuse to spell correctly)

Grayson:     "Well, I'm sorry, but it's my time, not yours or Mr. Sensenberner's, so I will reclaim my time, and I will point out that what you just you would NOT agree to is from a Supreme Court case called the United States V Brown, something I would expect you might know about, given your name."
Outside voice:     "Will the gentleman yield?"

Grayson:     "No."

    One voice laughs

Grayson:      "Uh, listen, we, we are trampling on people's Constitutional rights. And I think it's unfortunate that the mania that exists on the other side of the aisle regarding this one organization, and we know why that mania exists, it's because they've registered an awful lot of Democrats, continues to distort and waste the time of this committee and many other committees here in Congress. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I yield my remaining 5 seconds"
Logged Return to Top

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. -- Teddy Roosevelt
stroh
Sleeveless Hoodie
From: Impact Crater Springs, CA

Karma: 155
Posts: 16135
Offline Offline

We're doomed!

View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2009, 01:50:06 PM »

I should have paid more attention in Civics class.
Logged Return to Top
Blader
Straitjacket

Karma: 21
Posts: 2075
Offline Offline

vagazzling vajayjays since 1876!!

View Profile WWWIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2009, 04:35:05 PM »

link, please
Logged Return to Top
gleek
Flak Jacket

Karma: 107
Posts: 9484
Offline Offline

E chu ta!

View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2009, 06:16:36 PM »

Grayson's a badass. The rest of the Dems are pussies compared to him. Too bad there isn't an equivalent of Grayson in the upper house. The US Senate is *goshdarn* useless--so many *fudge* nuts from piss ant states wielding way too much power.
Logged Return to Top

Woman, open the door, don't let it sting. I wanna breathe that fire again.
MFAWG
Rich Corinthian Leather Jacket

Karma: 31
Posts: 5720
Offline Offline


View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #4 on: October 22, 2009, 08:32:32 PM »

link, please

Love you too: Up on FARK and Kos, complete with video goodness. Don't feel like actually doing the homework.  Grin

On edit: Had not seen the video until about ten minutes ago. The transcript doesn't even come close to portraying the complete pwnge going on. Broun basically quits on the whole thing.

The ending is classic:

« Last Edit: October 22, 2009, 10:22:45 PM by MFAWG » Logged Return to Top

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. -- Teddy Roosevelt
MFAWG
Rich Corinthian Leather Jacket

Karma: 31
Posts: 5720
Offline Offline


View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #5 on: October 22, 2009, 08:42:13 PM »

I should have paid more attention in Civics class.

This is something I actually DID learn in high school civics:

You just can't make a law that's targeted at one group of people or an individual, and you *fudge*IN' A can't do it retroactively, ie: You pissed me off, now it's against the law, and off to jail you go.

It's completely against EVERYTHING we're supposed to stand for.

[SemiDrunkenRant]

What's really shocking to me is how willing our duly elected legislator's seem willing to completely ignore that or, worse yet, just don't *goshdarn* understand it. What's REALLY scary is the state of the judiciary, which is SO right wing in the classical sense of the word that they may, in fact, be willing to rubber stamp ANYTHING the legislature puts through and the Executive signs.

[/Semidrunkenrant]

PS: I'm not showing links to prove basic civics.  Shocked

Logged Return to Top

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. -- Teddy Roosevelt
Blader
Straitjacket

Karma: 21
Posts: 2075
Offline Offline

vagazzling vajayjays since 1876!!

View Profile WWWIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #6 on: October 23, 2009, 05:52:58 AM »

Grayson's a badass. The rest of the Dems are pussies compared to him. Too bad there isn't an equivalent of Grayson in the upper house. The US Senate is *goshdarn* useless--so many *fudge* nuts from piss ant states wielding way too much power.

He sure is a breath of fresh air.  Grayson speaks in an antiauthoritarian way that seems to indicate he really doesn't give a *feces* if he's ever re-elected.  Which is cool and unique.  He speaks like a true outsider, beholden to no cause but reason. 

The wingnuts, if they want to be taken seriously ever again, would be wise to run a few from Grayson's playbook.

I have to also say that Franken seems pretty remarkable, too.
Logged Return to Top
Aske
Lederhosen

Karma: 120
Posts: 31318
Offline Offline


View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #7 on: October 23, 2009, 06:41:50 AM »

didn't watch video or search web yet.

-- do understand concept of bill of attainder --
what sort of law is trying to be implemented and against whom?
Logged Return to Top

Quote
Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century.
--  Chimpy McFlightsuit, CEO of Bu$hco Industries of 'Merka
MFAWG
Rich Corinthian Leather Jacket

Karma: 31
Posts: 5720
Offline Offline


View ProfileIgnore this user
Re: [Politics/Religion] Farkin' EPIC win
« Reply #8 on: October 23, 2009, 06:57:24 AM »

The bill being discussed would remove all federal funding from ACORN by name. Not 'All Organizations' that have been accused of criminal activity, but just this one organization that Republicans don't like much.
Logged Return to Top

The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first, the love of soft living and the get rich quick theory of life. -- Teddy Roosevelt
Pages: [1]   Return to Top
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Related Posts
[Politics/Religion] live blogging VP debate
oohhhBiden epic win on the maverick issue....huge
by Blader

[Politics/Religion] soooooo... 1 more...
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/contact-gap-proof-of-importance-of.htmlep
by Aske

[Politics/Religion] crybaby supreme
some democrat should introduce some unexpected, awesome pro-troops, etc  bi
by Aske

irony surrenders [Politics/Religion]
That's farkin' beautiful.Plus 1!
by MFAWG

 


 
  Powered by SMF | SMF © 2001-2009, Lewis Media

Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM